Scribd
Upload
80 views2 pages

Sanchez v. Rigos: Contract Perfection

The document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 1972 regarding the perfection of a contract for the sale of land between Nicolas Sanchez and Severina Rigos. The Court held that there was a perfected contract based on an "Option to Purchase" agreement executed by the parties. Even though an option is typically unilateral and not binding without consideration, the Court found that upon Sanchez accepting the offer, it created a bilateral promise to sell and buy, making it a binding contract of sale. Additionally, the Court stated that even if the option was not initially binding for lack of consideration, Sanchez's acceptance before withdrawal would constitute a binding contract of sale.

Uploaded by

Jener James
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
80 views2 pages

Sanchez v. Rigos: Contract Perfection

The document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 1972 regarding the perfection of a contract for the sale of land between Nicolas Sanchez and Severina Rigos. The Court held that there was a perfected contract based on an "Option to Purchase" agreement executed by the parties. Even though an option is typically unilateral and not binding without consideration, the Court found that upon Sanchez accepting the offer, it created a bilateral promise to sell and buy, making it a binding contract of sale. Additionally, the Court stated that even if the option was not initially binding for lack of consideration, Sanchez's acceptance before withdrawal would constitute a binding contract of sale.

Uploaded by

Jener James
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Sales Perfection of contract NICOLAS SANCHEZ [Link] RIGOS G.R. No.

L-25494 June 14, 1972 Facts: Rigos and Sanchez executed an instrument entitled "Option to Purchase," whereby Mrs. Rigos "agreed, promised and committed ... to sell" to Sanchez the sum of P1,510.00, a parcel of land situated in the barrios of Abar and Sibot, municipality of San Jose, province of Nueva Ecija, within two (2) years from said date with the understanding that said option shall be deemed "terminated and elapsed," if "Sanchez shall fail to exercise his right to buy the property" within the stipulated period. Several payment were made by Sanchez but Rigos rejected thus Sanchez filed an action for specific performance. the lower court rendered judgment for Sanchez, ordering Mrs. Rigos to accept the sum judicially consigned. Issue: Whether or not there was a perfected contract. Held: Yes. Theres no distinction between Articles 1324 and 1479 of the Civil Code and applied the former where a unilateral promise to sell similar to the one sued upon here was involved, treating such promise as an option which, although not binding as a contract in itself for lack of a separate consideration, nevertheless generated a bilateral contract of purchase and sale upon acceptance. Speaking through Associate Justice, later Chief Justice, Cesar Bengzon, this Court said: Furthermore, an option is unilateral: a promise to sell at the price fixed whenever the offeree should decide to exercise his option within the specified After accepting the promise and before he exercises his option, the holder of the option is not bound to buy. He is free either to buy or not to buy later. In this case, however, upon time. accepting herein petitioner's offer a bilateral promise to sell and to buy ensued, and the respondent ipso facto assumed the obligation of a purchaser. He did not just get the right subsequently to buy or not to buy. It was not a mere option then; it was a bilateral contract of [Link], even supposing that Exh. A granted an option which is not binding for lack of consideration, the authorities hold that: "If the option is given without a consideration, it is a mere offer of a contract of sale, which is not binding until accepted. If, however, acceptance is made before a withdrawal, it constitutes a binding contract of sale, even though the option was not supported by a sufficient consideration.

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs against defendant-appellant Severina Rigos. It is so ordered. Prepared by: Jener Barrameda law 2D

You might also like